This installment of Liquid Crystal is the first of a three-part series about software rating systems, specifically about the ones implemented for use with the gaming industry. This first article will deal with the issues surrounding the creation of ratings and what the ratings mean for consumers. Part two will discuss the advantages of ratings while the last segment will examine the drawbacks of such systems. Advocates on either side of the issue are quite adament about their respective viewpoints. I will provide a review of both sides, exposing the real truths about software rating.

A few years ago, the release of such games as Mortal Kombat and Doom caused a great debate to begin. Not only did they herald in a new grand era of gaming, but they also drew attacks from non-violent opposition. Fans were amazed and contented with the new titles while others were simply appalled. Critics scornfully remarked that such games would cause a young audience of fans to grow up accepting violence and being real-life serial killers and gratuitus gore addicts. Gamers were simply interested in having a good time, with some simulated violence thrown in to make it a semi-realistic experience. The battle lines were quickly drawn. Non-violence advocates called for a ban on games of this nature. Gaming fans swiftly mentioned the fact that it was only entertainment. This battle, unlike virtual ones, would be fought with words, not a BFG9000.

The United States, being a "melting pot" and a "salad bowl" in cultural composition, has always been a place for the freedom of speech and expression. This argument was centered around whether an individual's (or company's) right to free expression was supreme, even though another group disliked it. The U.S. has always conformed to the idea of "majority rule with minority rights." Basically, neither side won the battle, but a compromise was reached.

Rather than being censored by the government, the software industry decided to voluntarily subject itself to a rating system for its products. It was under these circumstances that the Electronic Software Rating Board (ESRB) and the Recreational Software Advisory Council (RSAC) were formed. These boards were intended to be made up of parents, teachers, and community leaders working together as a consortium for the rating of software products, especially games.

Now, the ESRB and RSAC rate nearly every peice of gaming software that comes along. Yet, questions remain. Are the people that comprise the ESRB and RSAC really representative of the nation's demographics or are the organizations only representing an isolated minority? Are the ratings effective? Do the ratins always reflect the exact content of a certain product?

Maybe more important is the issue of rating itself, whether it is imposed or voluntary. Who really decides how something should be rated and does that person really have the authority to do so? Should this decision be up to a small group of people or the consumer? These questions and many more will be discussed in part two of this series.

Back to Liquid Crystal main page

Copyright © 1997 InfoMedia, Inc. All rights reserved worldwide.